Thursday, January 2, 2014

ACH is bad, but the banks are worse


So there’s been a lot of talk about BitCoin lately, and I particularly liked this piece by Guan - BitCoin’s real value is it's payment system. It doesn't necessarily work very well as a store of value or unit of account, but the very low transaction costs and ease of signup make it attractive as a payments system. The 1% cost of some bit coin transactions is very acceptable for small payments, and its fairly typical for small payments to cost more on a % basis than large ones. That vast majority of bitcoin payments cost far less than 1%, and thats very cheap for an international payments system. 

One of the reason’s that Bitcoin has become popular is because the US payment system sucks - ACH was originally designed in the early 70s, and its way out-dated compared to most of the national payment systems across the globe. Of course most of those systems were built and deployed 20+ years after ACH, but thats kind of the point: the US payments system is outdated and creaking under the demands of today's world. Unfortunately, the big banks that monopolize banking in the US have stymied all efforts at fixing the problem

So I agree with the thrust of Guan's post, but thought it might help to clarify some things - 
  1. ACH is actually a next business day system not unlike what Guan describes in Denmark. If your bank sends an ACH payment to the Federal Reserve by midnight, the Federal Reserve will send it to the receiving bank by 6 am of the next business day. In reality, the cut-off is 2.15 am ET, so really it takes less than 4 hours. However, almost 100% of banks in the US are on batch processing systems left over from the 70s, so each of the steps of making an ACH transfer: 1)debit sender’s account; 2) send to recipient bank via Fed; 3) recipient bank credits recipient account; ends up taking 1 day, and thats what leads to the 2-3 business day time for the end to end ACH payment.
  2. The Federal Reserve charges banks $0.0025 cents per ACH transaction. Thats right, less than 1/3rd of a cent. Think about that the next time your bank tries to charge you $10 for a “Next-day payment”. That’s essentially the bank sending an ACH transaction to the Fed tonight without holding your money for a couple of days first, and charging you for the privilege.
  3. FedWire costs banks $0.138 per transaction. Think about that the next time your bank charges you $35 for a wire transfer.
  4. So if back-end transaction costs are so low, why are retail costs so high? Some markup is to be expected, but these margins are insane, especially given the massive scale of US payments systems. ACH moved $37 trillion in 2012. Because NACHA, the standards body that sets ACH standards, is controlled by the big banks, not by Congress. So essentially, the banks write the rules, and the Federal Reserve implements them. 
  5. Not all customers in the US can get a bank account easily. There are 17 million unbanked adults in the US, and 10s of millions more are "underbanked". One of the main causes is that they ran afoul of a bank some day, and got their name added to debit bureau systems like ChexSystems/Qualifile. Most banks in the country will deny an account for anybody who has a ChexSystem entry.
As even Guan realizes in his post, the payment system is one part of the problem, but the outdated technology being used by banks is another big part. There are over 7000 banks in the US, plus 1000s of credit unions, so fixing the problem of outdated batch processing technology is a herculean task. Forcing banks to adopt new systems, which might allow them to automatically post a FedWire transaction intra-day without teller involvement for example, would bankrupt a lot of the smaller banks. The big banks are even worse off technology wise; CITI has spent billions of dollars to build a new BATCH processing transaction system which they are still rolling out globally; most of the others aren't even trying to fix their systems. Why should they, when they can just pass on the costs to customers, and the regulators aren't allowing any competition?

The Reserve Bank of Australia recently moved to same-day payments in Australia, and all the banks in Australia have a timetable to move to real-time payments within 5 years. The Federal Reserve in the US doesn't even have the authority to think of such a move. So yes, retail payments systems in the US are broadly fucked for consumers. But if you're wondering why, it's because Congress and the regulators have failed consumers in the US.

8 comments:

  1. how ridiculous is it to consider btc as a payment system without considering the commission and time-expense you incur in exhanging from USD or whatever in and out of BTC?

    ReplyDelete
  2. -- a.t. Expense...USD ..BTC

    BTC to BTC transactions work well, USD to X transactions go through a bad system, this post explains the technical and organization faults ,

    The USD is a token for a poorly designed payment system, therefore you should avoid it when making and accepting payments. This may require you to adjust your saving and spending habits.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I was thinking that the Brazilian payment system was a piece of crap until read this two articles. Here we have a almost instant interbank payment option called TED, between 6 a.m. and 5 p.m., for transactions over BRL 1000, and for less we use the DOC, which pays overnight, both on business days. Those transactions generally costs about BRL 10, but you can have some account types that doesn't even charge for those transactions. In fact, these account types don't even have a monthly fee or subscription payment.

    For transfers to an account in the same bank generally is free and unlimited, also is the usage of the debit card (withdraws have fees after a certain number in a month)

    For business payments, we have the "Boleto", which is issued in one bank and can be paid in any bank, and you don't even need an account to pay, just go to a teller and pay with cash.

    For subscriptions, we have the Automatic Debit system, which a business charge a customer directly on his account, without human intervention. And because a large amount of complains, now banks are implementing the Authorized Direct Debit system, which is automatic, but the account owner can approve/refuse the debit. A Boleto can be registered in this system, so you don't even need the barcode to pay it.


    And checks, that looks like to be widely used in US are practically banned by business here. They were largely used for fraud, and if a business accept a check, it first will cash it out (takes one to five days) and then provide the goods/services.

    I think we Brazilians have a wonderful payment system after all.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yup - most developed and many developing countries have better payments systems than the US now. Interesting info on Brazil.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I really like your blog. I enjoyed reading your blog and is both educational and interesting.Thanks! Read More

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hello I am jui Islam work as a social media marketing and data entry operator on Fiverr. But i have a problems, my gigs are not on the first page and my sell are not increasing i don't know what is the problems, please take a look of my data entry gig on fiverr and tell me what is the problem!!! I will do 2000 youtube high quality

    ReplyDelete
  7. Most people not bear their banks to order on-line checks as a result of the check prices area unit way too dearly-won. Most of the time the banks merely order the checks for you thru different check printers and price the worth even more.
    check designs

    ReplyDelete
  8. Nice Post! If you’re using your checks for business, don’t worry because there are some people who’ve decided to go for a more formal look by keeping the original design of their checks, except they’ve added a few more helpful information that their clients can use.

    order bank checks

    ReplyDelete